Rasmussen Tracking Poll [Obama vs McCain]

[Sam Spade]

Might be a bounce going on here.  No idea how great it'll be.

[J.J.]too soon to tell.  I'll let you know later in the week [/J.J.]

lolololololol

And he would be right.  Gallup shows nothing, so it's impossible to tell yet.

[Sam Spade]

Might be a bounce going on here.  No idea how great it'll be.

[J.J.]too soon to tell.  I'll let you know later in the week [/J.J.]

lolololololol

I just let you know on Gallup.  Obama has weakened.  It has tightened again.

There will be a convention bounce, but it won't last long.

Well, obviously not, since the Republican convention follows right on its heels.

[Sam Spade]

Interesting...  Anyway, with the Clinton speech, you hope it's the right kind of speech, getting the right kind of bounce.

[Sam Spade]

Wednesday - August 27, 2008:

General: Head-to-Head

McCain: 44% / 47%, including leaners (NC, +1)
Obama: 44% / 46%, including leaners (NC, NC)

Favorability

McCain: 56% favorable  (-1)
Obama: 53% favorable  (NC)

This is not good news for Obama.  There should should be some movement toward him at this point.  The Clinton's and Obama's may make that difference.  Maybe Gallup will show it.

Be patient.  It isn't too earlier for the VP thing, however.

[Sam Spade]

Biden was wrong choice, nationally.  That is obvious.  Obama should be at least holding at this point; he's not.

I think Biden as a name didn't get Obama anything off the starting blocks, and may have hurt him by virtue of not being a woman. However, Biden in action has yet to make a mark. Whether he will or not, we'll see, but he was chosen for both his credentials and his fight.

Biden was not that unknown. 

If you are presidential candidate, you've just announce your (not particularly controversial) VP candidate, you are are in day two of your convention, and your numbers are dropping, you may have a problem.  The only one that I think of where something even close to this has happened, where the nomination had been decided, was possibly Bush in 1992.  I don't think his numbers dropped, actually, just stayed the same.

Obama can save it, but the Stadium Speech is already being derided for the setting.  It may work out, but the signs so far are NOT favorable for Obama.

They weren't taking polls during day two of the convention in 1992, JJ.  And technically, this poll only includes day one of the convention, not day two.

The only conventions I recall with no bounce after the convention were McGovern 1972 and Bush 1992, though I may be forgetting something.  Whatever.  

I note that part of the reason why McGovern got no bounce was because his nominating speech occurred at 2AM.  Much like Obama's VP announcement.

[Sam Spade]

The only conventions I recall with no bounce after the convention were McGovern 1972 and Bush 1992, though I may be forgetting something.  Whatever. 

I think Kerry failed to get a bounce.

You're technically right, though in reality that bounce appeared *after* the Gallup poll was done (which is the historical measure).  And then it got killed completely by Swift Boats.

After re-reading Gallup, I see the Bush 41 in 1992 got 5%.  So count me wrong there too.

[Sam Spade]

You're technically right, though in reality that bounce appeared *after* the Gallup poll was done (which is the historical measure).  And then it got killed completely by Swift Boats.

After re-reading Gallup, I see the Bush 41 in 1992 got 5%.  So count me wrong there too.

Clealy you're going off of the numbers while I'm going off of memories of freak-outs on Daily Kos.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109702/Conventions-Typically-Result-FivePoint-Bounce.aspx

I do have a *scary* ability to remember numbers very well, but sometimes I switch them around.  That's why I remember the post-Gallup bounce (because Gallup polled too quickly). 

For example, I still remember every the sequences and scores of every playoff game that my hometown Rockets had when winning the championships in 1994 and 1995.

[Sam Spade]

Seems about right.  I suspect what Rasmussen is saying is if it was 1-3 before the convention, you can expect it to be 3-5 after the convention (or at least that's what sounds "modest" to me).  But then again, you can't predict night to night new numbers, so all this is really guessing.

[Sam Spade]

It won't be until tomorrow that we have an entirely unpolluted sample that measures the effects of the Obama speech and the Palin announcement, but if this trend continues I must say that the whole VP announcement process was handled by McCain's people as best as it could be, at least according to Rasmussen. 

[Sam Spade]

Damn, I was going to post that!  It's either the Palin *bump* or polling on Labor Day phenomenon.  Your choose.  

[Sam Spade]

Damn, I was going to post that!  It's either the Palin *bump* or polling on Labor Day phenomenon.  Your choose.  

Gustav?

Well, that could be included as well.  In this case, I'm merely giving two quite reasonable explanations for the result that support both sides' cases.  In support of the latter argument, I might have hazarded a guess that Rasmussen wouldn't have polled yesterday (neither he nor Gallup polled July 4 or Memorial Day either).

In truth, you have to wait until the sample comes out because based on my guesses the previous two day's samples were roughly even at about O+3, with Friday's sample being about O+6.  This sample would have to be O+11 or 12 or so.

[Sam Spade]

While there isn't a weekend Obama bounce in Rasmussen, there might have been something related to Gustav.  You had 4 Republican states (probably close to 10% of the US population) where there was a lot evacuations due to to Gustav; that alone could account for it.

I doubt more than 1% of the country's population (3 million) evacuated their homes, and certainly no more than 2%.

You also have phone lines down, people away from their phones getting supplies, people not responding because they are watch hurricane coverage.  Part of that is why M-D won't poll FL after a hurricane.  If we should get one in the NE, you might see an Obama drop (and we might).

I think you're clutching at straws.

I agree.  The reasonable analysis is mine, regardless of which side you take, imho. (not to brag too much  )

[Sam Spade]

Palin poll numbers done yesterday.  About what I expected to see - still favorable views of her (52-36), but partisanship growing.  Women less favorable, men about the same, if not more (go figure) - proves my theory again!

Henceforth, the conclusion can clearly be made that the speech is very important.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/52_still_have_favorable_view_of_palin_but_partisan_gap_widens

[Sam Spade]

Note that her ready to be President numbers have dropped substantially from Friday. Now its 48%-29% no, a 19 point deficit compared to a 2% one on Friday. That is the number that is going to drive the McCain-Obama numbers, not Palin's favorables. People seem to view her as a nice lady who is maybe a bit too busy to be Vice President.

Oh, of course.  That's why the VP speech is crucial.

[Sam Spade]

It is likely the one-day bump on Monday was a blip because yesterday's sample must have been somewhere between Obama +2-4, maybe slightly less, to lead to this result.  That means Obama's lead will likely be 3 or less come Friday.  I also note that this sample was taken before last night's convention, undoubtedly.

[Sam Spade]

It also seems that Palin's appeal lies more with men than women.

What did Sam Spade tell you?  Maybe you should listen to him more often. 

[Sam Spade]

It also seems that Palin's appeal lies more with men than women.

What did Sam Spade tell you?  Maybe you should listen to him more often. 

he told me that Obama "never had a chance" to beat Clinton back in February

I doubt I would have said that in February.  Please provide the link.  I might have said that after New Hampshire, but it was probably taunting.  In fact, that describes a decent bit of what I did that primary. 

[Sam Spade]

It also seems that Palin's appeal lies more with men than women.

What did Sam Spade tell you?  Maybe you should listen to him more often. 

Must have missed that one.

Read carefully... 

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=81775.msg1693682#msg1693682

[Sam Spade]

It also seems that Palin's appeal lies more with men than women.

What did Sam Spade tell you?  Maybe you should listen to him more often. 

he told me that Obama "never had a chance" to beat Clinton back in February

I doubt I would have said that in February.  Please provide the link.  I might have said that after New Hampshire, but it was probably taunting.  In fact, that describes a decent bit of what I did that primary. 

Obama had no chance from the moment he entered the Dem race.  Just FYI 

Yeah, January in between New Hampshire and South Carolina primary.  Told ya. 

[Sam Spade]

As should seem clear, last night's sample was the same - maybe slightly better than the one that replaced it.  Tomorrow, movement will undoubtedly occur towards McCain, as we have the Labor Day sample falling off and the Palin speech impact.  At a minimum, it will at least be a couple of points, but I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being 4 or 5.  McCain could lead, but I put those chances at low.

[Sam Spade]

Ya, the site is having some problems right now.  Rasmussen's people don't run their site as well as they should.

All I know from Drudge is that Palin is more popular than Obama or McCain now.

[Sam Spade]

lol  

[Sam Spade]

That's with leaners.  If accurate, that means yesterday's sample was somewhere around a push.

[Sam Spade]

That's with leaners.  If accurate, that means yesterday's sample was somewhere around a push.

What is a push when you are talking about polling?

Push = tie

[Sam Spade]

Considering that this is both the labor day sample rolling out and Palin's speech rolling in, I'm actually not too displeased.

As JJ says, we'll know what really happened on Monday

Considering how much Rasmussen weights this poll, I suspect Monday is going to look a lot like pre-DNC with fewer undecideds.  Gallup will probably show more volatility, I would think.

But who knows?  Be patient.